Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

iDOS 3 Rejected by Apple

litchie.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 116 posts

Re: iDOS 3 Rejected by Apple

#101

Post by dghlsakjg »

tshaddox wrote: post #35
skissane wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What’s needed is for regulators to step in. Create an independent government-run tribunal to which app store review decisions can be appealed by the developers, and legally mandate Apple/Google/etc to obey its rulings. Maybe the EU will do it. If the EU mandated it other jurisdictions would likely follow. Even if they didn’t, you’d likely just be able to incorporate an EU subsidiary, then resubmit the app in the subs…

A government tribunal is probably one of the very few ways to make the experience worse than it already is.

I live in Canada where there are Ombudspeople and tribunals for many dispute resolution processes. Getting them involved usually lights a fire under a company's ass in my experience.

it is far preferable to hashing everything out in court (or not, if you aren't swimming in cash).

I wish the lawmakers would just step in and regulate gatekeeping on devices, rather than reviewing every dispute. I would be perfectly happy with the same model they use on my macbook for unapproved binaries. If I download a non-approved app, just let me know that it is donwloaded from the internet/not approved safe by Apple, and let me run it if I so choose.

Re: iDOS 3 Rejected by Apple

#102

Post by fragmede »

kelnos wrote: post #59
fragmede wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

when the verge story details your app, why your so was denies from the app store, why future apps from the same developer might be blocked from the app store, I'd consider it relevant

Maybe they disagree with the conclusions in the Verge article and don't think it deserves further publicity. Even if they're wrong, they're not obligated to argue against themselves.

They're not obligated to, but when I talk to the first person and they tell me a story, and then I talk to other people and I hear a completely different story, I start to question the first person's framing of things.

Re: iDOS 3 Rejected by Apple

#103

Post by immibis »

scarface_74 wrote: post #99
immibis wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good.

So you’re okay with a feature not existing for customers who want because the government deigns that they shouldn’t have it? You really want the government taking away your agency to make your own choices?

I'm okay with bad things not existing and I'm okay with Apple throwing a tantrum and going home because the government says it can't do bad things. It can miss out on all that juicy revenue if it wants to, and the world will be better for it.

Re: iDOS 3 Rejected by Apple

#104

Post by scarface_74 »

immibis wrote: post #103
scarface_74 wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you’re okay with a feature not existing for customers who want because the government deigns that they shouldn’t have it? You really want the government taking away your agency to make your own choices?

I'm okay with bad things not existing and I'm okay with Apple throwing a tantrum and going home because the government says it can't do bad things. It can miss out on all that juicy revenue if it wants to, and the world will be better for it.

So Apple Intelligence “is a bad thing” because from day one they don’t have interoperability? Does that serve customers in the EU better?

What juicy revenue do you think they were going to get from iPhone mirroring to the Mac?

And the EU as a whole is less than 10% of their revenue?

Re: iDOS 3 Rejected by Apple

#105

Post by frankvdwaal »

scarface_74 wrote: post #99
immibis wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good.

So you’re okay with a feature not existing for customers who want because the government deigns that they shouldn’t have it? You really want the government taking away your agency to make your own choices?

I for one am absolutely against features not existing for customers who want it just because the Apple deigns that they shouldn’t have it. I don't want Apple to take away my agency to make my own choices.

Good thing governments are on the side of the consumer at least, right?

Re: iDOS 3 Rejected by Apple

#106

Post by hulitu »

phone8675309 wrote: post #93
TillE wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> While the DMA may eventually force Apple to slide on this rule, currently it doesn't actually solve the problem at-hand. People keep saying stuff like this about the DMA and it's very confusing to me. Of course Apple can choose to break the law, but there are consequences for that. It doesn't mean the law is ineffective just because investigation and enforcement is not instantaneous.

Right? By that logic, why have laws against murder?

Boeing whistleblowers ? /s

Re: iDOS 3 Rejected by Apple

#107

Post by throwaway2037 »

bhawks wrote: post #54
giancarlostoro wrote: post #2

Apple seriously needs to make all internal coms about rejecting apps public to the person being rejected. I do mean all this way, when people blog about it, there's no more ambiguity and it can be assessed. Also, you can see if they're rejecting it for something they already approved of prior. It feels like some people doing the reviews dont look at prior history at all. Maybe they dont even get access to it, or mayb…

This type of chest beating principal lacks nuance, there are certainly reasons why a reasonable person would agree it is in Apple (or any marketplace operator) not to share rationale directly with the creator. The easiest example would be comms indicating that Apple is detecting malicious behaviors (spam, fraud, abuse, etc) in the app. Disclosing information what can (and implicitly what cannot be detected) is self d…

Post-2008, globally important financial institutions are required to submit private, internal risk reports to regulators. It would not always be prudent to make this information public, but it makes good sense for regulators to see it -- privately.

It seems like if we want to have "fair" duopoly app stores (Apple and Android), then we need a regulator who is fully embedded and integrated into the process, but can view all details of the decision, including ones that should legitimately stay private (security, etc.). To be clear, the regulator needs to have the final say on what will be private and not. Also, the regulator needs to be involved in the appeals process.

That said, I still think we need to allow multiple app stores on each platform. Meta is large enough to do it. Yeah, I know, that will get no love here. And, unfortunately, it probably means lower security for unsophisticated end-users.

Re: iDOS 3 Rejected by Apple

#108

Post by throwaway2037 »

ed_mercer wrote: post #16

Submitting apps to the App Store is one of the more frustrating things in life. Reviewers are lazy, random and don’t do any homework. You roll a dice and hope you don’t have any issues. Couple that with a bloated Xcode that still hasn’t learned anything from VS Code, long compile times, long processing times, bullshit compliance checkboxes and the time-consuming filling out of information of what your app is all abou…

Doesn't Xcode use Clang for Objective-C and Swift? I find it hard to believe the code is so bloated. LLVM/Clang and GNU GCC are neck-in-neck for code size and speed. The rest of your comment is fine. I'm sorry about your experience.

Re: iDOS 3 Rejected by Apple

#109

Post by throwaway2037 »

dghlsakjg wrote: post #101
tshaddox wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A government tribunal is probably one of the very few ways to make the experience worse than it already is.

I live in Canada where there are Ombudspeople and tribunals for many dispute resolution processes. Getting them involved usually lights a fire under a company's ass in my experience. it is far preferable to hashing everything out in court (or not, if you aren't swimming in cash). I wish the lawmakers would just step in and regulate gatekeeping on devices, rather than reviewing every dispute. I would be perfectly happ…

Australia also has a consumer protection bureau. It does exactly the same when you complain -- lights a fire under the ass of the maker. There are so many posts from Ozzies here about being "saved" by that bureau from a bad product.

Re: iDOS 3 Rejected by Apple

#110

Post by skissane »

throwaway2037 wrote: post #109
dghlsakjg wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live in Canada where there are Ombudspeople and tribunals for many dispute resolution processes. Getting them involved usually lights a fire under a company's ass in my experience. it is far preferable to hashing everything out in court (or not, if you aren't swimming in cash). I wish the lawmakers would just step in and regulate gatekeeping on devices, rather than reviewing every dispute. I would be perfectly happ…

Australia also has a consumer protection bureau. It does exactly the same when you complain -- lights a fire under the ass of the maker. There are so many posts from Ozzies here about being "saved" by that bureau from a bad product.

> Australia also has a consumer protection bureau

Australia does have relatively strong consumer protection laws. There is both a federal agency that does consumer protection and competition law (the ACCC, roughly equivalent to the US FTC) and also each state has an agency (my state’s is called Fair Trading NSW)

> There are so many posts from Ozzies

Random aside, I’d never thought about it before but it’s true - as someone pointed out on the Assange post, we Australians generally don’t call ourselves “Ozzies”, nowadays the standard spelling is “Aussies”

Post reply on HN